TexasCHLforum.com

loadedliberal wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:

speedsix wrote:...Toyota!!!

Well I drive a Prius, so.....

OMG a conservative in Pruis. That would be like Al Gore in a F-350

You would probably be quite shocked to see my haul 12 foot long 12" wide Hardie plank from Home depot with only 12" sticking out the back hatch, though I am most proud of finding a way to haul 4 by 8 plywood sheathing inside the car with the hatchback closed.

speedsix wrote:...Toyota!!!

Well I drive a Prius, so.....

speedsix wrote:...you're conservative...you use all those fancy words...I'm more of a radical...I just argue ... http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arguing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, I've been called worse.

speedsix wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:I am not trying to argue with anyone here. I consider CHL holders to be honest and largely competent people. I do find curiosities in some things such as the DPS website. It really is not a very large site if you remove the chl status database section, therefor I find it unusual that an AG opinion from so very long ago is prominent on their site. In many ways the opinion was quite nebulous, allowing quite a bit of latitude for government.

I also think most of us are old enough to realize that some laws can be enforced differently in different areas of the state. Differences in LEO's, DA's, and Judges provide opportunity for that statement to be so.

I come to this forum to explore new ideas as well as the tried and true. I would welcome the thoughts of one of the lawyers, but recognize that even then it would be an opinion. I believe that is one of the reasons they "try" cases.

Regarding Houston area parks, I do not know the specific parks, but expect that the larger ones would fall under the Corp of Engineers. I also suspect such areas would be near designated watershed regions of the counties.

...I think this place is FOR arguing and debating...if we were a bunch of bobble-heads and "Oh, Yeahs"...it wouldn't be any fun...

Were we arguing? I thought we were civilly discussing our differences of opinion!

I am not trying to argue with anyone here. I consider CHL holders to be honest and largely competent people. I do find curiosities in some things such as the DPS website. It really is not a very large site if you remove the chl status database section, therefor I find it unusual that an AG opinion from so very long ago is prominent on their site. In many ways the opinion was quite nebulous, allowing quite a bit of latitude for government.

I also think most of us are old enough to realize that some laws can be enforced differently in different areas of the state. Differences in LEO's, DA's, and Judges provide opportunity for that statement to be so.

I come to this forum to explore new ideas as well as the tried and true. I would welcome the thoughts of one of the lawyers, but recognize that even then it would be an opinion. I believe that is one of the reasons they "try" cases.

Regarding Houston area parks, I do not know the specific parks, but expect that the larger ones would fall under the Corp of Engineers. I also suspect such areas would be near designated watershed regions of the counties.

IANAL, but if the AG opinion above has no meaning, why would the DPS post it on their website? Scare tactics? I don't think they are posting it for no reason. I know we all want to carry any where our hearts desire, but I do not believe any of us should think of State law in the same manner as spiritual law:

1 Corinthians 6-12 "All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any."

If you read the complete AG opinion at the DPS website, it suggested that the county could enforce the matter and leave it to the test of the courts which the then Ag believed most county rules would survive. Worst case scenario is the opinion says that someone breaking the rule would be denied entry or made to leave, no suggestion of a fine or criminal penalty.

Call me conservative I guess.

sugar land dave wrote:I seem to remember reading an Attorney General opinion from several years ago. It stated his thoughts that although a municipality could not regulate chl carry in city parks, counties could perhaps regulate chl carry in the county parks. Sorry, I do not have a link handy.

Since no one noted my previous post, I went and looked it up for everyone:

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... .HTM#rapid

Prohibition of hanguns on rapid transportation and in city parks


August 30, 1995
Honorable Ron Wilson
Chair

Licensing and Administrative Procedures
House of Representatives
P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78768-2910

Opinion No. DM-364

...In answer to your third and last question, we believe that a municipality does not have the power to prohibit licensees from carrying handguns in city parks but that a county does have such power over county parks.

...Neither the concealed handgun law nor any other statute has restricted a county's police power over its parks under section 331.007 of the Local Government Code. We believe that section 331.007 permits the "governing body of a [county] park" to adopt a rule providing for the exclusion or ejection of persons carrying handguns from a county park if such a rule is reasonably necessary and appropriate for the accomplishment of a legitimate object falling within the county's police power under section 331.007. See Falfurrias Creamery Co. v. City of Laredo, 276 S.W.2d at 353.

...A county has the power to adopt a rule providing for the exclusion or ejection of persons carrying handguns from county parks if such a rule is reasonably necessary and appropriate for the accomplishment of a legitimate object falling within the county's police power under section 331.007 of the Local Government Code. The reasonableness and necessity of a measure taken under the county's police power is, in the first instance, a matter within the county's discretion. The courts would not disturb a county's regulation of handguns in county parks unless the regulation were clearly shown to be unreasonable and arbitrary.

Yours very truly,

DAN MORALES
Attorney General of Texas

JORGE VEGA
First Assistant Attorney General

SARAH J. SHIRLEY
Chair, Opinion Committee

Prepared by James B. Pinson
Assistant Attorney General


This is still on the DPS CHL website and has apparently not been superseded .

I seem to remember reading an Attorney General opinion from several years ago. It stated his thoughts that although a municipality could not regulate chl carry in city parks, counties could perhaps regulate chl carry in the county parks. Sorry, I do not have a link handy.